|
From: | Daniel J Sebald |
Subject: | Re: Couple comments about image_viewer and path behavior |
Date: | Sun, 26 Aug 2007 09:42:38 -0500 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041020 |
Quentin Spencer wrote:
I have always wondered why we had a separate path for images. I'm all for getting rid of it.
I'm on board for that. The only issue I wonder about is that if someone has a path in which there are very large numbers of database files it might slow down searching for M files? John W. Eaton wrote:
In addition to .m files, Matlab searches "MATLABPATH" for files read by load, opened by fopen, imread, etc. I suppose doing the same for Octave would be OK, but to avoid confusion, I don't think we should do so without a warning for files that have relative names and that are not found in the current directory.
I sort of see what you are getting at, but on further thought, why exactly? If the user enters
imread("./image1.jpg"); imread("../image2.jpg"); it is almost implicit that he or she has the current working directory in mind. But not so perhaps for imread("xray/tibia2.jpg"); The rule is always look from working directory first, right? So Octave would look for "./xray/tibia2.jpg" then any other directories (sub "xray") afterward. Dan Dan
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |